focus area (concentration) syllabifebruary 2016 2 professional backgrounds of focus (concentration)...

Focus Area (Concentration) Syllabi

Directed Study Courses Syllabi included in this publication.

Portfolio (IDAS597) — page 5

Field Practicum: Focus Area (IDAS680) — page 10

Professional Training: Focus Area (IDAS635) — page 19

Specialization Essay: Focus Area (IDAS696) — page 22

Research Project (IDAS697) — page 24

Online Courses Syllabi will be available at the time of each course.

Applied Statistical Methods (IDAS613)

Development Research Methods (IDAS623)

http://www.andrews.edu/grad/idp/resources.html

February 2016

2

Professional Backgrounds of Focus (Concentration) Advisors

Lilianne U. Doukhan

[email protected]

Lilianne Doukhan, Ph.D., is Associate Professor at Andrews University and holds a joint

appointment with the Department of Music and the Department of International Language

Studies. Dr. Doukhan lectures worldwide on issues in Worship and Music, and has published

articles on the same topic in several professional journals.

Dawn I. Dulhunty [email protected]

Dawn Dulhunty, an Australian by nationality, is currently the Director of the International

Development Program. She is also an Assistant Professor of International Development with the

Department of Behavioral Sciences in the College of Arts and Sciences. Dawn has been

undertaking a PhD (ABD) in Public Health with the School of Population Health at the

University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Previous to her employment with Andrews

University, Dawn and her husband Paul worked with ADRA in humanitarian projects for over 20

years.

Tevni E. Grajales Guerra

[email protected]

Tevni Grajales Guerra is a Professor of Research and Statistical Methodology in the

Educational and Counseling Psychology Program, School of Education, Andrews University.

His experiences include being a pastor (7 years), teacher and researcher (14 years), and

Conference and Educational Institution Administrator (14 years). Dr. Grajales earned his BA in

Theology from Columbia Adventist University (1970), MA in Educational Leadership from

Loma Linda University (1986), and Doctor in Educational Sciences from Latina University

(1995). His professional memberships include AERA since 1997 and NCME since 2004.

Clive Holland

[email protected]

Clive Holland completed doctoral studies at Michigan State University in Plant Physiology

and Genetics, while also specializing in Crop Production & Management. His postdoctoral study

was in tropical crops at the University of Florida before he filled a faculty position in the Plant

Science Department at South Dakota State University.

In the mid-1980s he transitioned from academia to a commercial biotechnology company

where he spent 25 years in this science and company management. In 2003 he was awarded an

honorary doctorate from Andrews University for his contributions in science towards feeding a

hungry world. Clive has been involved in United Sates Agency for International Development

(USAID) programs for over 25 years, specifically in short-term consulting within African and

East European countries, as well as mainland China. He currently fills the role of professor in the

Agriculture Department of Andrews University.

3

Darius Jankiewicz [email protected]

Darius Jankiewicz is associate professor of Historical Theology at the Seventh-day Adventist

Theological Seminary at Andrews University, Berrien Springs. He joined the faculty in 2008.

Born in Poland, Jankiewicz immigrated to Australia in 1986 and received his Bachelor of

Arts in theology from Avondale College in 1989. Following his graduation he worked as a pastor

in the Greater Sydney Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.

In 1993 he moved to USA where he completed Master of Divinity and Ph.D. degrees,

graduating in 2001. His dissertation, which he completed under the chairmanship of Dr. Raoul

Dederen, dealt with authority in the church.

Following his graduation he returned to Australia where he served as the senior pastor of

three churches in Tasmania. In 2003 he was ordained to the Gospel ministry. In 2004, he was

called to serve as a professor of theology at the Adventist owned Fulton College in Fiji. In 2007

he was called back to the USA to serve as a professor of theology at the Seminary.

Jankiewicz is married to Edyta and has two daughters, Caitlin (14) and Ashley (12).

Thomas B. Lowing [email protected]

Thomas Lowing is an Associate Professor and full-time faculty member in the School of

Architecture, Art and Design at Andrews University. His academic career includes 15 years as an

adjunct faculty member in the School of Architecture at the University of Notre Dame and he is

an alumnus of the University of Michigan (M. Arch). He is a licensed, practicing architect with

15 years of professional experience prior to entering academia full time. He serves students and

professional interns as the IDP Educator Coordinator for NCARB, is an active member of the

AIA, and serves the profession and community on a national committee and on the board of

directors of a local NGO respectively. He and his wife, Vicki, both enjoy mentoring others

through their leadership development business she began in west Michigan.

Marcella Myers [email protected]

Marcella Myers is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Andrews University in Berrien

Springs, Michigan, USA. Her primary interests are welfare states, public policy, and political

parties. Dr. Myers’ current research focuses on the possible relationship between austerity

measures and income inequality. Dr. Myers is a board member of the Michigan Political Science

Association and a member of the Midwest Political Science Association. In June 2012 Dr. Myers

received the distinction of being a Fulbright Scholar through a study grant to participate in the

Fulbright German Studies Seminar in Berlin, Germany.

Lucile Sabas

[email protected]

Lucile Sabes is an Associate Professor of Economics in the School of Business

Administration at Andrews University. She received her PhD degree in International Macro-

economics from the University of Sorbonne in Paris where she also earned her Bachelor of Arts

and Master of Arts in Economics. Before coming to Andrews, she served as the Rector at the

University of Cameroon and also as a Professor and Director of the Research Center of the

School of Business at the University of Montemorelos, Mexico.

4

David A. Steen [email protected]

David A. Steen is Professor of Biology, Emeritus at Andrews University. He is an alumnus

of Southern Adventist University (B.A. in Biology with a minor in Chemistry 1968) and Loma

Linda University (MS in Biology (1972) and a PhD in Biology (1974). For a dozen years before

coming to Andrews University in 1986, Steen taught biology at his Southern alma mater as well

as serving as department chair and head of the Division of Science. During his nearly three

decades at Andrews University he has taught, mentored students in research, chaired the

department and provided leadership for the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, &

Mathematics) Division. Having enjoyed his childhood years as a missionary's son growing up in

Ethiopia, Steen has a strong interest in helping improve educational opportunities in developing

countries. He serves on the board of GEM Resources International, a philanthropic foundation

focused on the educational and medical needs of disadvantaged people. Together with his wife,

Dr. and Mrs. Steen work to strengthen and improve marriages in their community. For more than

a decade they have worked in a variety of family life programs. The couple have two grown

children, three grandsons and one great granddaughter. In their spare time they enjoy motorcycle

touring, hiking, and canoeing.

5

Course Syllabus Portfolio (IDAS597)

1 Credit

I. Course Description An organized collection of educational and professional accomplishments is produced. This will include basic personal and background information, a profile of the Focus area, outstanding academic work, and other artifacts acquired to demonstrate achievements and competencies related to international development.

II. Overall Program Competencies 1. Professional administration in humanitarian initiatives

a) Demonstrate understanding of phases of project management b) Ability to design sustainable projects c) Actively participate in development collaborative relationships/partnerships

2. Application of humanitarian principles a) Ability to contextualize humanitarianism in culturally diverse environments b) Incorporate human rights, gender, age, and disability needs into programming

3. Effective Communication a) Ability to clearly communicate knowledge and information to stakeholders b) Concise writing to convey information

4. Engagement in research-informed practice and practice-based research a) Ability to use technology to maximize both effectiveness and efficiency (computer literacy,

web searching and formatting) b) Reflection of learning for optimal impact of programs c) Critical analysis and usage of diverse sources of knowledge

III. Course Learning Objectives The Portfolio course is to demonstrate evidence of achievement for professional development in the student’s Focus area, and the ability to write in a creative and critically reflective manner. The student will demonstrate this by:

1. preparing educational and professional accomplishments to date; 2. selecting the Focus area or specialization; 3. identifying and reflecting on the learning experience to meet professional and personal objectives

by participating in the MIDA program.

IV. Methods of Instruction The requirements for this course are completed through a directed study format where no formal class instruction is involved. To complete the Portfolio requirement the student will work with the Focus (Concentration) Advisor. This includes on-going supervision during each session where the core courses are offered and through e-mail communication as necessary.

V. Credit Hour Description A graduate one (1) credit course taken in the Master of International Development Administration

(MIDA) degree of Andrews University requires a total of 45 hours of instruction and student assignments.

For this field based Portfolio course, the Focus (Concentration) Advisor estimates that this total of 45

hours will be distributed between the following course requirements.

6

VI. Course Requirements Creative and reflective writing will be required for the following documents. The IDP Style and Formatting Guidelines should be followed.

1. Life Sketch The Life Sketch is an autobiographical description of the student. It should include something about the student's family, his/her formative years, and the significant forces that have made the student who s/he is today. The last paragraph of the life sketch should be a personal mission statement of 3-4 sentences. Limit: 500-750 words

2. Goal Statement By means of the Goal Statement the student describes his/her professional goals to be achieved by participating in this program. Limit: 200-250 words

3. Scope of Work The student is to select a Focus area or specialization in which the student will focus his/her study in one field of learning and practice at an advanced level. A Scope of Work is prepared to detail a narrower focus/topic selected by the student within his/her Focus area or specialization. It should include the reasons or rationale which led to the selection of this Focus area, and the perceived need for the study in this specialized field. The Scope of Work will be approved before any further requirements can be commenced related to the student’s Focus area. See example at the end of this syllabus. Minimum 200, Limit 300 words.

4. Annual Reflection Papers The Reflection Paper asks for the student to record his/her thoughts as to how the student's expectations have or have not been met in terms of his/her work and study. Have the student's goals been met? Why or why not? What has the student learned? What can be done differently to increase learning? To what extent has the MIDA degree program helped the student improve his/her work performance? What has the student implemented from the MIDA degree program? This is to be submitted according to the date given by the Focus (Concentration) Advisor. A total of four annual reflection papers will be submitted, one for each intensive session attended. Limit 500-750 words.

5. Curriculum Vitae The student will submit at the end of the program an updated Curriculum Vitae, or resume, which outlines his/her educational and professional accomplishments to date. This should include categories in the following order: (1) Education, (2) Employment, (3) Professional activities, memberships, and credentials, and (4) Accomplishments, honors, and awards. Limit two (2) pages.

6. Final Reflection Paper

The Final Reflection Paper is a reflective, critical response the student’s entire learning experience during the MIDA program. Have the student's personal and professional goals been met? What has the student learned? To what extent has the MIDA degree program helped the student improve his/her work performance? Below is the outline to be followed when writing the Final Reflection Paper. Submitted as the very final requirement for the program. Minimum 1500 words.

A. Reflect on the curriculum (700 words)

• Were the courses relevant to community and international development? • Were the assignments valueable? • Which courses were most helpful to your work? • Did the curriculum strengthen your practice of project cycle management? • Did the curriculum encourage you to explore ethical and philosophical issues? • What was the overall value of this program as it relates to your education and career goals?

• Did you develop mastery of your area of specialization? • Did you master research skills for community development practice?

7

B. Reflect on the instructors (125 words) • Were the instructors aware of current developments in their field? • What traits do you expect and appreciate in an instructor? • Was the style of teaching helpful and conducive to learning?

C. Reflect on the professional/career outcome (350 words)

• How has this program met your career goals? • Has the program made you competitive in the market place? • What are your future job and career opportunities now that you have a master degree? • Would you recommend this program to others?

D. Reflect on the value of the program to your organization (150 words)

• How did the program relate in regard to your work performance? • Did your employer or colleagues comment on knowledge you had gained? • Was there opportunity to develop professional networks?

E. Recommendations and Conclusions (175 words)

VII. Grading Standards This course is graded by the Focus (Concentration) Advisor, and will be graded either Satisfactory (S) or Unsatisfactory (U). A Satisfactory grade will be assigned if a score of at least 80 points (out of 100) has been achieved.

Assignment Points Life Sketch 10 Goal Statement 10 Scope of Work 10 Annual Reflection Papers (one for each session) 40 Current CV 10 Final Reflection Paper 20 TOTAL

100

VIII. Assignment Submission 1. Submit written assignments via email to the Focus (Concentration) Advisor; 2. The Focus (Concentration) Advisor will confirm receipt of messages from the student within 7-10

days; 3. As most portfolio documents are an active process, the final grade will not be given until the end

of the student’s time in the program when each paper has final approval. Portfolio papers will follow the IDP Style and Formatting Guidelines;

4. The Portfolio documents do not have a cover page (curriculum vitae is an exception). On the upper right hand corner and flush right each document will have the student’s name, description of the paper, and submission date. For example:

Eliza Dolittle

Reflection Paper for South Africa 2013 Submitted January 2014

IX. Preparing the Portfolio Contents Organizing the artifacts for inclusion in a Portfolio collection is not required for the grade of this course, so it is the responsibility of each student of the MIDA program to present the Portfolio documents in a media (print, electronic, DVD) to best suit his/her professional needs. The required documents generated above provide the basis for a Portfolio. The benefit of preparing a Portfolio is that it shows through an organized collection of artifacts evidence of achievement of the learning objectives throughout the MIDA degree program. The audience consists of all persons interested in the student's growth. It can also be used as a tool to enhance employment opportunities, showing skills and qualities of the student to meet the needs of an organization/company. In summary, the Portfolio development is a worthwhile learning experience, but not required. Below is a suggested format to arrange in a Portfolio format the artifacts from the achievements in the MIDA program.

8

Personal Profile Life Sketch Goal Statement Peak Experiences (photo-journalism reports)

Focus Area Profile Scope of Work Field Practicum Reports Field Practicum Presentation Synthesis Paper Colloquium Specialization Essay

Research Profile Research Proposal IRB Approval Research Project Research Publication

Reflection Papers Annual reflection paper for each of the four sessions attended Final reflection paper

Curriculum Vita An updated Curriculum Vita which outlines professional accomplishments to date.

9

Example of Scope of Work

John Doe

Scope of Work

Submitted April 2016

(first paragraph “what”)

I have selected Public Health as my focus area. The specific focus will be in mother and

child nutrition by educating and disseminating relevant health topics topics at the community

level.

(second paragraph “why”)

The reason I have selected this area of focus is because I am a health worker in the Sahel

region. This region has been affected by climate change causing recurrent droughts that has led

to food and nutrition insecurity. This shortage in food has resulted in severe acute malnutrition in

mothers and children. I strongly believe that my organization could make an impact in

alleviating malnutrition by empowering the women to enhance their knowledge of understanding

of the implications of malnutrition.

(third paragraph “how”)

During my Field Practicum, I will explore approaches to increase the knowledge in

nutrition and health for mothers and children. I will baseline my own organization, and

benchmark an organization who is well established in the area of maternal and child health as it

relates to nutrition. Further, over the next two years I will attend 30 hours of training/workshops

related to maternal and child health and specifically nutrition. The final research focus has not

been decided yet.

10

Course Syllabus Field Practicum (IDAS680)

2 Credits

I. Course Description The Field Practicum integrates International Development theory into practice. There are two options to fulfill the Field Practicum. Students will complete either; (1) a baseline and benchmarking study to understand best practices in the focus area; or (2) complete an internship of 300 hours in a sponsoring organization. The course culminates with an oral presentation of the students’ findings and experiences.







III. Course Learning Objectives The Field Practicum course is a process to gain insights of best practices related to the focus area. The student will demonstrate this by:

1. selecting relevant organization/s to explore the macro environment of the focus area; 2. determining comparative measurements to collect information on best practices; 3. analyzing best practices related to the student’s focus area; 4. producing a written report on the best practices; 5. presenting orally the Field Practicum results.

IV. Methods of Instruction The requirements for this course are completed through a directed study format where no formal class instruction is involved. To complete the Field Practicum requirements the student will work with the Focus (Concentration) Advisor. This includes on-going supervision at the time of each session where core courses are offered and through e-mail communication as necessary.

V. Credit Hour Description A graduate two (2) credit course taken in the Master of International Development Administration


For this field based Field Practicum course, the Focus (Concentration) Advisor estimates that this total of

90 hours will be distributed between the following course requirements.

VI. Course Requirements The Field Practicum provides learning to incorporate practical expertise and analyze best practices related to the selected focus area. This is achieved through the student engaging in one of the following activities, followed by an oral presentation.

11

Options for Field Practicum 1 Baseline/Benchmark Studies, Reports, and Presentation (details Section IX); or 2. Internship Experience, Reports, and Presentation (details Section X).

Focus Area Presentation The student is required to share in an oral presentation the results of the Field Practicum experience. This will be evaluated by MIDA faculty/instructors, giving consideration to feedback provided by student peers. The presentation is to be given during the time and location of an intensive session.

VII. Grading Standards This course is graded by the Focus (Concentration) Advisor and will be graded either Satisfactory (S) or Unsatisfactory (U). A Satisfactory grade will be assigned if a score of at least 80 points (out of 100) has been achieved.

Assignment Points Concept Paper 10 Field Practicum Reports 60 Focus Area Presentation 30 TOTAL

100


days.

IX. Baseline and Benchmarking Studies The grade for the Field Practicum is given once the following three parts are completed, (1) concept paper, (2) baseline and benchmarking study report, and (3) oral presentation. Concept Paper Before commencing the baseline and benchmarking activities a concept paper is prepared. The sections for the Concept Paper should include (1) the organizations and/or companies which are proposed, (2) questions to be used for both studies, (3) proposed methodology, (4) target group/sample, and (5) timeline. Once the Concept Paper is approved, the baseline and benchmarking studies may commence. A detailed example of a concept paper is found at the end of the course syllabus. Content for Baseline and Benchmarking Report The written report is a summary of both the baseline and benchmarking studies. The report should contain a minimum of 3,000 words and a maximum of 4,000 words in the main body of the report. The IDP Style and Formatting Guidelines are expected for this report. Content details include:

Cover Page, according to IDP Style and Formatting Guidelines. Table of Contents, to reflect the following sections of the report. Introduction Should cover the rationale for starting the study in relation to the selected Focus area. Outline the overall topic and what are the specific questions to be addressed.

Historical Analysis Provide a brief history of both organizations and projects to be studied. Include country facts, key players (organization/project staff, government and community leaders, donors, etc.) and resources both human and technical to conduct the study. Methodology Describe how the baseline/benchmarking studies were conducted; the research questions addressed, subjects interviewed (administrative and project staff, stakeholders, etc.); the assessment tool(s) used (interviews for key informants or focus groups etc.).

12

Results Write about the measurable and objective results/findings from both studies. When appropriate, include tables or graphs to further explain the results and findings. Discussion and Conclusion Relate your results back to your initial question/s or hypothesis. Do the results support or disconfirm them? What strengths and weaknesses are implied? What explanations do you have for your results? Write a summary statement about what you learned (best practices) as it relates to your focus area. Recommendations Identified and recommendations for application back to the baseline organization. References Includes references cited in the report/s. Appendix 1. Assessment Tool (copy of interview/focus group questions). 2. Benchmark Correspondence (copy of the letter to the organization requesting involvement, and a

letter of approval from the organizations, if appropriate.) 3. Map/s.

The Baseline/Benchmark Presentation An oral presentation culminates the Field Practicum experience. The written report needs to be approved four weeks prior to the scheduled presentation. A presentation of twenty minutes (using PowerPoint or similar program) is required. A five minute question and answer period will follow the presentation. The presentation should contain the following:

1. Introduction of student name and area of Focus 2. Define terms related to the Focus area 3. Information on Baseline and Benchmarking studies

i. Brief description of the organization studied ii. The objectives or questions studied with the organization iii. Methods used: interviews, materials reviewed iv. Findings/results – data obtained v. Interpretation of the meaning of data in terms of strengths and weaknesses

4. For the Benchmarking study include the following: i. Best practices identified ii. Application/discussion of how findings in the benchmarking study may be applied back to the

baseline organization

X. Internship Experience The grade for the Field Practicum is given once the following three parts are completed, (1) concept paper, (2) written report from internship experience, and (3) oral presentation. Concept Paper Before commencing the 300 hour Internship experience, a concept paper is developed to include the following sections (1) sponsoring organization/s for the internship, (2) role in the internship, (3) learning objectives, and (4) timeline. Once the Concept Paper is approved, the Internship activities may commence. A detailed example of a concept paper is found at the end of this course syllabus. Content for Internship Report The written report should contain a minimum of 2,500 words and a maximum of 3,500 words in the main body of the report. The IDP Style and Formatting Guidelines are expected. Content details include:

Cover Page according to IDP Style and Formatting Guidelines. Table of Contents to reflect the following sections of the report.

13

Agency Profile The Agency Profile is a summary of the sponsoring agency/organization in which the student will complete the Internship. The Agency profile should include, but is not limited to, the following sections:

1. Agency/organization name and contact information; 2. Facts about the country/region where the agency is situated. For example: population,

literacy rate, land area, gross national product, economic statistics, and “poverty processes” at work. Development terminology should be used where appropriate;

3. History of the agency/organization and the purpose it exists; 4. Mission and vision of the agency/organization; 5. Major projects being carried out by the agency/organization; 6. Strengths and impact projects are having on the current situation of the community and

country. Share a success story of the agency/organization; 7. Describe the future direction of the organization (strategic plan) and what some of the

challenges that the organization expects to face. Describe at least one future opportunity and threat.

Discussion

1. Outline student’s role involved during the internship. Include details of the supervisor; 2. Describe best practices identified as it relates to the student’s Focus area; 3. Describe how the internship strengthened understanding of the student’s Focus area; 4. Reflect if the Internship experience has met the learning expectations/objectives.

Recommendations 1. Describe topics, from the Focus area, where the organization needs further research in order

to better equip the agency/organization to address the needs of the community, county/region;

2. Recommendations for the sponsoring agency/organization in relation to “project management cycle” issues.

References Includes references cited in the report. Appendix

1. Photos capturing the agency/organization in action, press releases, funding graphs, and other points of interest;

2. Sponsoring organization correspondence (copy of the letter to the organization requesting involvement and a letter of approval from the organization or project);

3. Map/s.

The Internship Presentation An oral presentation culminates the Field Practicum experience (see peer evaluation form at the end of the course syllabus). The written report needs to be approved four weeks prior to the scheduled presentation. A presentation (using PowerPoint or similar program) is required. The student will be held to a 20 minute time slot for the presentation. Therefore, the presentation should be carefully planned and rehearsed to fit within this framework. A five minute question and answer period will follow the presentation. The presentation should contain:

1. Introduction of student name and Focus area; 2. Define terms related to the Focus area; 3. Introduce internship organization/agency; 4. Name and role of internship supervisor; 5. Outline student’s role in the internship; 6. Programs related to the Focus area which involved the student; 7. Outline best practices; 8. Outline lessons learned and recommendations; 9. How the internship strengthened understanding of the student’s Focus area.

14

XI. Resources The resources section will include general resources as well as (a) suggestions for quality Focus area presentations, (b) concept paper for baseline/benchmarking studies or internship, and (c) peer evaluation form for the presentations. Boxwell, R. J. (1994). Benchmarking for competitive advantage. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill. Camp, R. C. (2006). Benchmarking: The search for industry best practices that lead to superior

performance. New York, NY: Productivity Press. Keehly, P. & Abercrombie, N. (2008). Benchmarking in the public and nonprofit sectors: Best practices

for achieving performance breakthroughs. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Saul, J. (2004). Benchmarking for nonprofits: How to measure, manage, and improve performance. Saint

Paul, MN: Fieldstone Alliance. Suggestions for quality presentation of information in slides

1. The presentation is to cover the highlights of what you learned. It should not attempt to contain all the information in your written reports. Be sure that the best practices discovered through the research process and your recommendations are clearly presented at the end.

2. Expect no more time per slide than 1 minute. Thus, for a 20 minute presentation, the total

number of slides should not exceed 20.

3. Limit the amount of writing placed on each slide. The writing should easily be readable from the back of the presentation room. A font size in PowerPoint of 32 point is recommended for major points. Don’t use fonts below 24 point.

4. In making your presentation, assume the audience can read what is on the slide. Explain the slide

– don’t read it to the audience!

5. Ask a peer or your Focus (Concentration) Advisor to review your slide presentation several days in advance so revisions to improve clarity are possible.

15

Sample Concept Paper for Baseline/Benchmarking Studies This paper does not have a cover page, but the following heading:

Mary James Field Practicum Concept Paper

Submitted November 2013 Organizations Baseline study EMPOWER Rwanda is a faith based international NGO established in Rwanda 35 years ago. The baseline will focus on the field-based program for refugee education funded by UNHCR. This is a school in the Northern Province of Rwanda in the district of the river. Benchmarking study World Global is a faith based international NGO established in Rwanda 30 years ago and also has projects related to refugee education. The rationale for choosing World Global is that it has somewhat the same mission as EMPOWER, is faith based, and conducts very credible programs related to my Focus. Questions for both studies My focus is in Education specifically on the impact of education opportunities for children of refugee camps. The overall purpose of the Field Practicum is to explore the reasons refugee families send their children to schools and stay in the area of the refugee camp and what practices should be in place for these families. Questions for this study include:

1. What is the age of students from refugee families who normally join the school? 2. Are refugee children and their families accepted in the community where the schools are established?

3. Will the refugee families plan to settle permanently in the area? Methodology

1. Documentation review of project reports 2. In-depth interviews 3. Focus groups 4. Observation

Target/Sample Group Parents of the children Village leaders Teachers of the school Field project staff/donors (no children will be interviewed in this study) Time line

1. Approval of Field Practicum concept during December 2013; 2. Baseline to commence January 2014. Report will be written in February 2014; 3. Benchmarking study to commence March 2014 and report written in April 2014; 4. Field Practicum power-point presentation prepared during May/June 2014. During October 2014 the Field Practicum results will be presented.

16

Sample Concept Paper for Internship Experience This paper does not have a cover page, but the following heading:

Mary James

Field Practicum Concept Paper Internship Experience Submitted July 2015

Focus (Concentration) Area I have selected a focus in Public health specifically in the area of mother and child nutrition. Organization

EMPOWER Rwanda is a faith based international NGO established in Rwanda 35 years ago. The internship will focus on the nutrition program implemented by this organization.

Supervisor Ms. Sandra Blair is the Program Director of the organization and will be responsible for the internship experience. Goals

1. Collect country and regional facts as they relate to nutrition; 2. Prepare an agency profile; 3. Understand the process in developing and implementing projects that impact public health; 4. Visit the project site and collect success stories; 5. Describe the direction of the organization; both strengths and challenges. 6. Identify best practices related to mother and child nutrition 7. Make recommendations for improvement as needed

Methodology 1. Documentation review 2. In-depth interview of program staff 3. Observation

Time line

1. Approval of Field Practicum concept during July 2015; 2. Internship to commence on October 2015. Report will be written in January 2016; 3. Field Practicum power-point presentation prepared six weeks before proposed presentation in

October 2016.

17

Oral Field Practicum Presentation — Peer Evaluation

Baseline/Benchmarking Studies

Student Name: ___________________________ Focus Area: ______________________________

Professional Demeanor Good Keeps audience attention well, appropriate eye contact, looks and sounds professional.

Fair Generally good presentation but could engage the audience more.

Poor Presentation weakened by poor eye contact, voice quality, inappropriate dress, language etc.

Organization & Flow Good Presentation flowed logically and was clear.

Fair Generally well organized and somewhat maintained focus but occasionally too wordy.

Poor Elements not relevant to subject matter. Hard to follow, more logical flow needed.

Creativity Good Ideas/concepts were presented in an innovative and useful manner.

Fair Ideas/concepts somewhat straight forward however little creativity towards the product.

Poor Unimaginative, ordinary and did not keep my attention.

Goals Good I had a good understanding of the purpose and goals of the study.

Fair I generally understood the study but it could have been clearer.

Poor I generally was not sure as to the direction of the study.

Research Questions Good Questions were stated clear, succinct and related to the goals.

Fair Questions were generally related to the goals.

Poor Questions poorly stated or vaguely related to the goals.

Methodology Good Methods used appropriately answer the research questions.

Fair Better methods may have been found to answer the research questions.

Poor Methods inadequately and inappositely defined.

Findings Good Well-articulated findings which refer back to answering the research questions.

Fair Generally understood how the findings relate to the research questions.

Poor Findings did not directly address the research questions, poorly understood.

Best Practices Good Clearly identified best practices related to the area researched.

Fair Somewhat able to identify best practices in the area researched.

Poor Not able to clearly identify best practices related to the area researched.

Recommendations Good Logical and related to the study.

Fair Somewhat addressed but could have been clearer or stronger.

Poor Vague or not related to the study.

Questions & Answers Good Demonstrates extensive knowledge of the topic by responding confidently, precisely, and

appropriately to questions and audience feedback.

Fair Demonstrates some knowledge of the topic by responding accurately and appropriate to questions

and feedback.

Poor Demonstrates incomplete knowledge of the topic by responding inaccurately and inappropriately to

questions and feedback.

Additional Comments

18

Oral Field Practicum Presentation — Peer Evaluation

Internship Experience

Student Name: ___________________________ Focus Area: ______________________________

Professional Demeanor Good Keeps audience attention well, appropriate eye contact, looks and sounds professional.

Fair Generally good presentation but could engage the audience more.

Poor Presentation weakened by poor eye contact, voice quality, inappropriate dress, language, etc.

Organization & Flow Good Presentation flowed logically and was clear.

Fair Generally well organized and somewhat maintained focus but occasionally too wordy.

Poor Elements not relevant to subject matter. Hard to follow, more logical flow needed.

Creativity Good Ideas/concepts were presented in an innovative and useful manner.

Fair Somewhat straight forward with little creativity towards the product.

Poor Unimaginative, ordinary, and did not keep my attention.

Goals Good I had a good understanding of the purpose and goal/s of the internship.

Fair I generally understood the reason for the internship.

Poor I generally was not sure as to the purpose of doing the internship.

Organization Good I had a good understanding of the organization of the internship in terms of the country,

organization profile including programs.

Fair Generally understood why this organization was selected for the internship.

Poor Was not clear why this organization was selected to meet the needs of this internship.

Roles Good Roles and purpose of internship were clearly articulated including supervision.

Fair Generally understood the roles and purposes of the internship including supervision.

Poor Roles and purpose not clearly defined, including supervison.

Best Practices/Lessons Learned Good Clearly identified best practices and lessons learned related to goals.

Fair Somewhat able to identify best practices and lessons learned related to goals.

Poor Not able to clearly identify best practices or lessons learned.

Relevance to Focus Area Good Articulate knowledge and skills gained from the internship that relate to the focus area.

Fair Generally able to articulate skills and knowledge gained from the internship to the focus area.

Poor Unable to articulate knowledge and skills gained from the internship.

Questions and Answers Good Responds confidently, precisely and appropriately to questions and audience feedback.

Fair Satisfactory response to questions and audience feedback.

Poor Unclear response to questions and audience feedback.

Additional Comments

19

Course Syllabus Professional Training: Focus Area (IDAS635)

2 Credits

I. Course Description Students are required to participate in Professional Training related to the selected Focus area, culminating in a synthesis paper on best practices learned during the training. In addition, the student will design and implement a Colloquium to present best practices in the Focus area.







III. Course Learning Objectives The Professional Training course is designed so the student can demonstrate competencies in the Focus area by:

1. selecting and participating in 30 hours of Professional Training related to the Focus area; 2. establishing networks with experts in the selected Focus area; 3. synthesizing in writing the learning experience of the training/s, and current trends in the

selected Focus area; 4. planning and implementing a Colloquium to stakeholders, presenting best practices from the

Focus area.

IV. Methods of Instruction The requirements for this course are completed through a directed study format where no formal class instruction is involved. To complete the Professional Training requirements the student will work with the Focus (Concentration) Advisor. This includes on-going supervision at the time of each session where core courses are offered and through e-mail communication as necessary.

V. Credit Hour Description A graduate two (2) credit course taken in the Master of International Development Administration


The Focus (Concentration) Advisor estimates that this total of 90 hours will be distributed between the

following course requirements.

20

VI. Course Requirements The grade for the Professional Training is given once the following three requirements are completed: (1) 30 hours of training in the Focus area, (2) synthesis paper, and (3) colloquium. 1. Professional Training Students are required to select 30 hours of Professional Training with approval from the Focus (Concentration) Advisor. This training is in addition to the IDP intensive sessions and may include (1) workshops offered by the student’s employing organization or another organization, (2) training sessions at professional meetings, (3) coursework taken at a local educational institution, and/or (4) on-line courses or seminars. The Professional Training requirements may be completed during one training or a number of trainings until the 30 hours are covered. Each Professional Training activity must have prior written approval from the Focus (Concentration) Advisor. For approval students will need to submit the following in an email:

i. Title training activity; ii. Organization offering the training; iii. Number of training hours; iv. Speaker/s; v. Topics to be covered in the training.

2. Synthesis Paper In preparation for the Synthesis Paper, a report is required after each Professional Training activity. Limited to 250-500 words and including the following:

i. Title of training activity; ii. Major presenter/s and sponsor; iii. Number of total instructional clock hours; iv. Major points gained for your understanding of the Focus area; v. Reaction and reflection.

Following the completion of 30 hours of Professional Training, the student will submit a Synthesis Paper of 2,000-2,500 words. This paper must follow IDP Style and Formatting Guidelines and contain the following:

i. Cover Page; ii. Training/s attended, including the title, major or noteworthy speakers, and sponsoring

agency or institution; iii. Discussion of what was learned in the training event(s) integrated with best practices related

to the Focus area. 3. Colloquium Students are required to prepare and deliver a Colloquium to disseminate knowledge and expertise on best practices the student has accumulated during the Professional Training requirements. This Colloquium should be presented to stakeholders interested in the Focus area of the student. The Colloquium includes:

i. Preparing a teaching curriculum of 1-2 hours related to the Focus area; ii. Organizing the Colloquium using marketing abilities to attract an audience; iii. Delivering the Colloquium including evaluation sheets for the audience to provide feedback

on the colloquium; iv. Completing a self-evaluation sheet using the evaluation feedback from the audience as well as

your own sense of the strengths and needed improvements in the Colloquium; v. Writing a report of the Colloquium experience to be sent to your Focus (Concentration)

Advisor which includes the following: (1) title of the Colloquium, (2) location and date, (3) outline of curriculum presented, (4) demographics of audience and number of participants, (5) summary of the audience evaluation, and (6) summary of self-evaluation.

21

VII. Grading Standards This course is graded by the Focus (Concentration) Advisor and will be graded either Satisfactory (S) or Unsatisfactory (U). A Satisfactory grade will be assigned if a score of at least 80 points (out of 100) has been achieved.

Assignment Points Professional Training Activities 20 Synthesis Paper 45 Colloquium 35 TOTAL

100


days.

22

Course Syllabus Specialization Essay: Focus Area (IDAS696)

1 Credit

I. Course Description Students are required to broaden knowledge in their Focus area through synthesizing and critiquing scholarly journal articles, professional association publications, publications of multi-government organizations such as the United Nations or the World Bank, publications by various international non-government organizations, or internet resources. The outcome of this literature review will be a “Specialization Essay.”







III. Course Learning Objectives The student will demonstrate through the Specialization Essay the ability to synthesize and critique materials related to the focus area. The student will demonstrate this by:

1. producing a scholarly written paper identifying contributions that have advanced the selected Focus area;

2. developing a bibliography of resources pertaining to the Focus area.

IV. Methods of Instruction The requirements for this course are completed through a directed study format where no formal class instruction is involved. To complete the Specialization Essay the student will work with the Focus (Concentration) Advisor. This includes on-going supervision during each session where the core courses are offered and through e-mail communication as necessary.

V. Credit Hour Description A graduate one (1) credit course taken in the Master of International Development Administration (MIDA) degree of Andrews University requires a total of 45 hours of instruction and student assignments. For this course, the Focus (Concentration) Advisor estimates that this total of 45 hours will be distributed between the following course requirements.

23

VI. Course Requirements A Specialization Essay, consisting of a minimum of 2,500 (maximum 3,000) words in the main body of the paper. The paper is similar to a literature review which may be useful in completing the Research Project requirement for the MIDA program. This is a formal academic paper and should include the following parts:

1. Title page 2. Table of contents 3. Main body (see categories to include below) 4. References (each cited source must have a matching item in the reference list) 5. References

The Specialization Essay should begin with a brief explanation of the student’s Focus area, and then be divided into categories such as the following major sections:

1. pioneer workers in this field; 2. leading institutes and other places of influence; 3. professional networks; 4. dominant ideas and concepts; 5. pertinent policy issues; 6. pertinent ethical or philosophical issues; 7. problems and possibilities; 8. best practices; and 9. project cycle management implications.

VII. Grading Standards This course is graded by the Focus (Concentration) Advisor, and will be graded either Satisfactory (S) or Unsatisfactory (U). A Satisfactory grade will be assigned if a score of at least 80 points (out of 100) has been achieved.

Specialization Essay Points Explanation of the student’s selected Focus area 5 Identification of important leaders in this Focus area 10 Dominant ideas/concepts, pertinent policy, ethical or philosophical issues 20 Problems and possibilities 10 Best practices and project cycle management implications 20 Clarity of writing, including use of IDP Style and Formatting Guidelines 20 Appropriate in-text citations, reference and bibliography lists 15 TOTAL

100


days.

24

Course Syllabus Research Project (IDAS697)

3 Credits

I. Course Description A research project is carried out by a master’s degree candidate in which mastery of the research process is demonstrated. The student is expected to choose a research topic related to his/her Focus area.







III. Course Learning Objectives This course provides a creative scholarly research experience to identify international and community development issues related to the selected Focus area in which:

1. the background of the problem is clearly and succinctly stated; 2. the purpose, rationale, and scope for the study are well articulated; 3. the literature review is comprehensive; 4. the research question(s) is clearly identified; 5. the research methodology is clearly described; 6. the ethical considerations explored; 7. the strategies for collecting and analyzing data are clearly explained; 8. the finding are clearly presented, interpreted, and explained; and 9. the discussion and recommendations are logically related.

IV. Method of Instruction The requirements for this course are completed through a directed study format where no formal class instruction is involved. To complete the Research Project requirement the student will work with the Focus (Concentration) Advisor and an approved Research Mentor who is a specialist researcher in the Focus area.

V. Credit Hour Description A graduate three (3) credit course taken in the Master of International Development Administration

(MIDA) degree of Andrews University requires a total of 135 hours of instruction and student

assignments.

25

VI. Grading Standards This course is graded by the Focus (Concentration) Advisor and will be graded either Satisfactory (S) or Unsatisfactory (U). A Satisfactory grade will be assigned if a score of at least 80 points (out of 100) has been achieved.

Assignment Points Research proposal 15 Research paper 75 Overall Quality (conformity to IDP writing style, grammar, neatness, etc) 10 TOTAL

100

VII. Assignment Submission 1. Submit the final research project via email to the Focus (Concentration) Advisor; 2. The Focus (Concentration) Advisor will confirm receipt of messages from the student within 7-10

days. 3. The due date for the Research Project depends on the student’s planned date of graduation. There

are three opportunities for graduation each year and the assignment due date will coincide with these as follows:

May Graduation ........................... Due March 01 August Graduation ...................... Due June 01 December Graduation ................. Due November 01

VIII. Course Requirements The following six steps will outline the sequence for completing the research project.

1. Decide on a topic and prepare a research concept paper. A research concept paper should be developed to provide an overview of what the research project will plan to focus on. The formal research proposal should not be written until the research concept paper is approved by the Focus (Concentration) Advisor. The research concept paper should be one-two pages in length, single-spaced, and contain the following information:

1. Title 2. Background and Importance of the Study 3. Proposed sources to be used 4. Methodology to be utilized 5. Data collection strategies 6. Time line for conducting and completing this study

Once the research concept paper is approved by the Focus (Concentration) Advisor, the student will identify a Research Mentor in consultation with the Focus (Concentration) Advisor. A contract will be prepared for the Research Mentor to work with the student.

2. Develop a proposal. As research is never an individual experience, the proposal will be

developed in consultation with the Research Mentor who is an approved specialist researcher in the students’ Focus area. Research begins by researchers communicating their thoughts plans and objectives for others to read and discuss. The research proposal is the document that begins this research dialogue. A research proposal should not be cluttered with extra and irrelevant material. Whatever does not contribute directly to the delineation of the problem and its solution must be eliminated. Keep in mind the meaning of the word proposal. The word suggests looking forward to what is planned in the future by the researcher. Proposals follow a simple, logical form of presentation outlined by headings. The proposal should be at minimum of 10 pages (maximum 15 pages) and submitted to the Research Mentor. The proposal could be written under the following headings.

26

Cover Page (includes research title) Introduction

1. Purpose, rationale, and scope of the study 2. Guiding question/s 3. Definition of terms 4. Limitations of the study 5. The importance of the study

Review of related literature

This section must include at least 10 references

Methodology 1. Type of design 2. Selection and description of the site and the participants 3. Ethical considerations 4. Data collection strategies 5. Data analysis strategies

Management plan, timeline, feasibility

References

Appendices

3. Obtain IRB approval. On completion of the research proposal, an IRB application is submitted

to [email protected]. All MIDA students will submit an IRB application regardless of the type of research planned. The research project cannot commence until IRB has reviewed and approved the study.

4. Conduct research and write research project report. Regular contact with the Research Mentor during this phase of the study is highly recommended. As this is a formal academic paper, the IDP Formatting and Style Guidelines should be followed. Minimum 7,500 words and maximum 10,000 words in the main body of the paper. The paper will be returned if not within this word range. The research project headings will include the following:

Title Page

Follow IDP cover page template

Table of Contents Follow IDP Style and Formatting Rules

Abstract (250 words approx.) Succinct summary of your research project’s purpose, main points, methods, findings and

conclusions Followed by 4-7 key words

Introduction (500 words approx.) Identify the problem this research will address

– purpose, rationale for study – guiding research question/s

General definition of terms

Literature Review (2000 words approximately; 20 references minimum) Review relevant professional research and integrate concepts Last paragraph should introduce the research questions as they relate to the literature review

27

Methods Selection of sample/subjects/participants

– Selection process, numbers, restrictions Type of research design/materials

– data collection tools/instruments – definition of terms (how to measure) – research questions

Procedure – how study was accomplished – data collection strategy

Results Report on sample categories

– demographic (e.g. age, gender, socio-economic, education etc.) Report the findings/data as related to each research question Note: if tables are used be sure to reference in the body of the paper

Discussion Explain your results as they support/non-support your hypothesis/research questions

– include possible alternative explanations if appropriate Do your findings support existing theories or other research? Limitations of study (related to methodology) Suggest directions for future research

References Follow IDP Style and Formatting Rules

Appendices IRB approval from Andrews University Documents appropriate to study, may include

– data collection instruments – informed consent/organization consent – detailed tables of data collect

5. Write One Page Abstract and Identify 5-7 Key Words. This will be submitted with the final research project.

6. Approval of Research Project. Once the Research Project is completed, the Research Mentor

will confirm by email to the Focus (Concentration) Advisor that the content of the research project has been approved. The student will submit a copy of the final paper to the Focus (Concentration) Advisor for final approval. See the Research Project Rubric at the end of the course syllabus.

IX. Outline of Responsibilities during research process The process and responsibility of each person involved in the research process is summarized, but may include other factors not mentioned: Responsibility of student

1. Complete the following MIDA courses as a prerequisite to commence the research project;

• Applied Statistical Methods (on-line course)

• Development Research Methods (on-line course)

• Synthesis Paper and Specialization Essay

• Field Practicum (except presentation) 2. Prepare research concept paper. Research Mentor selected using this document; 3. Write research proposal; 4. Submit IRB application 5. Conduct research and write research project report.

28

Responsibility of Research Mentor 1. Advise student during the writing of the research proposal; 2. Advise student during IRB application process and specifically the protocol section; 3. Ongoing critique of the student’s work with appropriate and timely feedback; 4. Review and approve final research content of the project to be submitted to the Focus (Concentration) Advisor;

5. Approve one-page abstract and 5-7 key words. Responsibility of Focus (Concentration) Advisor

1. Approve concept paper and Research Mentor; 2. Briefly review IRB application and allow name to be used as Advisor; 3. Consult with the Research Mentor as necessary; 4. Once content approved by Research Mentor – review document, including IDP style and formatting;

5. Submit grade for class.

X. Academic Honesty Students of Andrews University are expected to display honesty in all academic matters. Please review the Academic Integrity section of the IDP Student Handbook for a complete description of what constitutes academic dishonesty along with the consequences for such academic behavior. Andrews University takes seriously all acts of academic dishonesty. Repeated and/or flagrant offenses will be referred to the Committee for Academic Integrity for recommendations and further penalties. The International Development Program respects international copyright regulations as they pertain to educational institutions and expects students to comply as well.

XI. Useful Resources

General Research: Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Los

Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Hinkle, D. E., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (2003). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences (5th ed.).

Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Salkind, N. J. (2011). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics

(4thed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Ivankova, N., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design:

From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3-20. Qualitative Research: Becker, H.S. (1998). Tricks of the trade. How to think about your research while you’re doing it. Chicago,

IL: University of Chicago Press. Bender, D. E., & Ewbank, D. (1994). The focus group as a tool for health research: issues in design and

analysis. Health Transition Review, 4(1), 63-79. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis.

Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Chenail, R.J. (2012). Conducting qualitative data analysis: reading line-by-line, but analyzing by

meaningful qualitative units. The Qualitative Report, 17(1), 266-269. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17-1/chenail-line.pdf

Chenail, R.J. (2012b). Conducting qualitative data analysis: managing dynamic tensions within. The Qualitative Report, 17(4), 1-6. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17/chenail-tensions.pdf

Easton, K. L., McComish, J. F., & Greenberg, R. (2000). Avoiding common pitfalls in qualitative data collection and transcription. Qualitative Health Research, 10, 703-707.

Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

29

Gubrium, J. F., & Holstein, J. A., (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of interview research: Context and method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kohlbacher, F. (2006). The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7(1).

Lareau, A., & Shultz, J. (1996). Journeys through ethnography: Realistic accounts of fieldwork. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Lincoln, Y. & Denzin N. (2003). Turning points in qualitative research: Tying knots in the handkerchief (Crossroads in Qualitative Inquiry). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lofland, J. & Lofland, L. (1995). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G.B. (2006). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. McLellan, E., MacQueen, K. M., & Neidig, J. L. (2003). Beyond the qualitative interview: Data preparation

and transcription. Field Methods, 16(63). Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Hoboken, NJ:

Jossey-Bass. Merriam, S.B. et al. (2002). Qualitative research in practice. Examples for discussion and analysis. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Miles, M., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication. Rich, Peter (2012). Inside the black box: Revealing the process in applying a Grounded Theory

analysis. The Qualitative Report, 17(49), 1-23. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17/rich.pdf

Rubin, H.J., & Rubin, I.S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing. The art of hearing data (2nd Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.

Schreiber, R.S. (2001). The “how to” of Grounded Theory: avoiding the pitfalls. In: R.S. Schreiber, P.N. Stern (Eds.). Using Grounded Theory in Nursing (pp. 55-83). New York, NY: Springer.

Seidman, I. E. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.

Seidman, I. E. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research. A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. (3rd Ed). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for

developing grounded theory (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing. Strauss, J., & Corbin, A. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for

developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing. Weiss, R.S. (1995). Learning from strangers. The art and method of qualitative interview studies. New

York, NY: The Free Press. Wolf, M. (1992). A thrice told tale: Feminism, postmodernism, and ethnographic responsibility. CA:

Stanford University Press. Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research. Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publishing.

30

Research Project Rubric Student Name: Date: Category Content Details Meets

Standard Needs minor corrections

Needs major corrections

Title Page IDP template

Abstract 1. Succinct summary of the research project 2. four to seven key words 3. 250 words approx.

Introduction 1. Identifies general purpose and research questions 2. General definition of major terms 3. 500 words approx.

Literature Review 1. Referenced and built on other professional research 2. Appropriate integration and flow of research findings/literature 3. Appropriate research questions 4. 2000 words approx. 5. 20 references minimum

Methodology 1. Appropriate description of sample/sampling process 2. Research design appropriate to answer research questions 3. Appropriate instrumentation (when needed) 4. Definition of terms in relationship to how they are measured 5. Appropriate and specific research questions

Results 1. Description of demographics of the sample 2. Report results of each research question 3. Adequate explanation of tables/diagrams

Discussion 1. Conclusions/explanation concerning the findings 2. Integration back to the research questions 3. Adequate understanding of the limits of the study

Citation/References 1. 20 references minimum 2. Followed IDP Style and Formatting Rules

Appendices 1. IRB approval 2. Appropriate supporting documents (where needed)

Components of research paper

1. Main body of research project 7,500-10,000 words 2. Followed IDP Style and Formatting Rules